About your Search

20120929
20121007
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
christopher stevens and three others. these images echo the worst -- the recall those moments in 1979 with the taking of american hostages at the embassy in iran. u.s. taxpayers as an enormous 1.6 billion doris to egypt, -- $1.6 billion to egypt, which is now run by a former member of the muslim brotherhood. should the u.s. give up foreign aid to these nations, mr. sadler? >> no. not now, we have a fledgling government being formed a. with egypt withholding funds, the editorial board agreed is time for us to stop the old on that aid. it is in our best interests to stay involved. if we do not stay involved, russia, china, and other countries with in this world will i do not think to cut off the aid. >> mr. cruz? >> this is another area of clear disagreement. we should not be funding those who are contrary to our interest. the only justification for continuing that aid or any portion of it is it to protect national security interests of the united states. we should use that aid as extensive leverage to protect national security interest. we should not be writing a blank check. lookit th
a question here? way, way in the back, is there a microphone in that last row there? >> steven call, university of maryland. is it important for the united states to abide by international law and liberal international order and is there a way the united states could use military force against iran's nuclear program without u.n. approval and be in compliance with international law? >> who wants to take that? want to take it. >> i will take it but don't want to be droning on and on. >> then speak briefly. >> i will speak briefly. the united states, first of all, you know you can go through a lot of presidents going back to including bill clinton obviously who took military action in kosovo in that case without a u.n. security council mandate and, barack obama ran and says repeatedly that he does not consider the united states bound by to pursue its interests bound by u.n. security council resolutions. merge has i would say am by lept attitude toward international law. we are in some respects the greatest spokesman sometimes for international law but throughout our history and through
. look, this is serious stuff. chris stevens' diary clearly indicated he was concerned. apparently there was some 13 warnings about the security there. but the most outrageous thing, my dear friends, is that five days after it was clear that this was a terrorist attack with mortars and rocket propelled grenades, they trotted out the u.n. ambassador who said this is a spontaneous demonstration bread by a hateful video. now, that is one of the most disgraceful performances i have ever seen. first year cadet at west point would have told you that that was -- you know, there is -- people sitting around benghazi, grab your mortar, honey, we're going to a spontaneous demonstration. >> gretchen: but senator, looking ahead then to these next debates, i don't know if the president will have it any better off because foreign policy, when we start talking about this, when mitt romney starts talking about it or the moderator, there is going to be a lot of questions to answer and it may be the first time that the president is forced to answer questions about libya. >> well, he did answer questi
to come to these things. you took a murky topic and made it clear. as the attorney of steven colbert, will he use that money to try to win the emmy from jon stewart? my real question is -- it is difficult to change. this is a time when things are so polarized. with new technology where everybody has their own axe to grind, address that as a dissuading factor. if i go home tonight, i can do whatever i want to as many people as i can reach. that is different from the time of jefferson. ben franklin are someone only needed to set that in print and now all you need to is to press a button. how does that fit into a campaign? >> obama cannot raise the money without technology. the net is different from a newspaper. you can say whatever you want an infinite number of people can read that. no one will know you wrote that unless you put money behind it or have a way of promoting it. there are similar barriers. you cannot say you're printing press is as important as someone else's printing press. it is more complicated. >> question surprised me. going to say we took a simple subject and made
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)